My nephew's fifth birthday party.

[Age]

The more I think about this the angrier I get. 'So what?' even if he won EVERY game fairly. It's HIS birthday. I don't remember winning anything at my own birthdays, or it particularly bothering me, but what I DO know is that I would have been traumatised if my parents had cheated me out of winning just to keep some OTHER child happy. That's confidence-destroying. Something that lasts. Your nephew will probably remember this for the rest of his life. His parent are obviously complete idiots. Most likely wokies.
My beloved grandmother used to tell me about how when she was very young she was chosen for the top netball team. One of the girls who missed out had a huge sobbing tantrum that the coach couldn't deal with so she just put my grandmother into the lower team and the manipulative girl into the top one.

Well that is what you were TOLD anyway.

My grandmother never forgot. Unfairness stays with you forever. The 'faux' winner at your nephew's party would have no doubt forgotten about his 'win' by the next day, unless he has a conscience and the embarrassment and shame stayed with him--probably a bit much to expect from a five year old.

[Age]

I presented an exaggerated tale for the purpose of showing how the argument from moral diversity can take a stronger form than is commonly assumed, on a philosophy forum where that sort of thing is supposed to get discussed.... and then nothing but howling mad grandmas losing their fucking shit over nothing.

So, you just LIED to us.

WHEN WILL this LYING, by adult human beings, EVER STOP?

Or, maybe you are just LYING to us now this time. Maybe to 'TRY TO' get away from the Fact of just how INAPPROPRIATE that group of adult human beings REALLY are, or were.

The kid is 20 now, so I guess I'll see if he is still in anguish over this horrible injustice from 15 years ago next time I see him. You guys are really fucking weird.

And starting a thread like you just did here, and 'expecting different results' is NOT weird, or as some one might ask, 'NOT INSANE'?

[ThinkOfOne]

As if it weren't bad enough that the "adults" lied to all the children playing that game, they then tried to sell him a load with the idea that it was done out of "fairness". No doubt he understood that THAT was a lie too. No wonder that he cried "twice as hard as before".

No surprise that he "agreed it was fair and affirmed that he understood". A five-year-old being brow beat by multiple "adults"? What could he say?

All the "adults" involved need to apologize and explain that they were wrong and where they got it wrong. Lest he grow up to be an adult that is as clueless about morality and fairness as them. Most likely the "adults" are clueless because of a similar experience when they were children.

'Most likely'. It is EXACTLY WHY ALL adults ENDED UP DOING Wrong.

If you don't understand everywhere you got it wrong, you really need to have a think on it.

But, obviously, 'you', adult human beings, can NOT 'have a think on it' WHEN 'you' do NOT even KNOW WHERE 'you' got 'it' Wrong.

You guys mucked things up about as much as could be. Even worse, you believe the ridiculous rationalizations that you generated so that you could feel good about it.

Is there AN adult human being who does NOT 'muck things up' NOR does NOT BELIEVE the RIDICULOUS "rationalizations" generated so that 'they' could feel good about the ACTUAL Wrong that 'they' ARE DOING, some of which 'they' do NOT YET even RECOGNIZE and KNOW 'they' ARE DOING?

Based on how you framed your responses, evidently you hold views that are pretty simplistic.
For example:

??? "It is EXACTLY WHY ALL adults ENDED UP DOING Wrong". There's more to it than that.

??? "human beings, can NOT 'have a think on it' WHEN [they] do NOT even KNOW WHERE [they] got 'it' Wrong. While many are incapable of doing so, there are many who can.

Also, your question is poorly framed. Care to try again?

[ThinkOfOne]

I presented an exaggerated tale for the purpose of showing how the argument from moral diversity can take a stronger form than is commonly assumed, on a philosophy forum where that sort of thing is supposed to get discussed.... and then nothing but howling mad grandmas losing their fucking shit over nothing.

The kid is 20 now, so I guess I'll see if he is still in anguish over this horrible injustice from 15 years ago next time I see him. You guys are really fucking weird.

"howling mad grandmas losing their fucking shit over nothing"? My, my, my...Can you spell ego-defense?

Care to try to formulate a well-reasoned response to the points of my post?

[FlashDangerpants]

I presented an exaggerated tale for the purpose of showing how the argument from moral diversity can take a stronger form than is commonly assumed, on a philosophy forum where that sort of thing is supposed to get discussed.... and then nothing but howling mad grandmas losing their fucking shit over nothing.

The kid is 20 now, so I guess I'll see if he is still in anguish over this horrible injustice from 15 years ago next time I see him. You guys are really fucking weird.

My, my, my...

Care to try to formulate a well-reasoned response to the points of my post?

You missed the point of the OP entirely. I was, as I have mentioned, recasting the Arg from moral diversity (aka Argument from Disagreement, or Argument from Relativity) which I find tends to be represented in a weakened form for no good reason.

You are welcome to take another try now that you understand, but I am not very interested in your overemotional first response.

[ThinkOfOne]

I presented an exaggerated tale for the purpose of showing how the argument from moral diversity can take a stronger form than is commonly assumed, on a philosophy forum where that sort of thing is supposed to get discussed.... and then nothing but howling mad grandmas losing their fucking shit over nothing.

The kid is 20 now, so I guess I'll see if he is still in anguish over this horrible injustice from 15 years ago next time I see him. You guys are really fucking weird.

My, my, my...

Care to try to formulate a well-reasoned response to the points of my post?

You missed the point of the OP entirely. I was, as I have mentioned, recasting the Arg from moral diversity (aka Argument from Disagreement, or Argument from Relativity) which I find tends to be represented in a weakened form for no good reason.

You are welcome to take another try now that you understand, but I am not very interested in your overemotional first response.

Nothing to do with "emotion" on my part, though ironically your "howling mad grandmas losing their fucking shit" response shows more than a little on your part. More ego-defense from you.

Your "recasting" was exceedingly weak as it has the immoral actions of the "adults" as its foundation.

Once again, care to try to formulate a well-reasoned response to the points of my post?

[FlashDangerpants]

My, my, my...

Care to try to formulate a well-reasoned response to the points of my post?

You missed the point of the OP entirely. I was, as I have mentioned, recasting the Arg from moral diversity (aka Argument from Disagreement, or Argument from Relativity) which I find tends to be represented in a weakened form for no good reason.

You are welcome to take another try now that you understand, but I am not very interested in your overemotional first response.

Nothing to do with "emotion" on my part, though ironically your "howling mad grandmas losing their fucking shit" response shows more than a little on your part. More ego-defense from you.

Your "recasting" was exceedingly weak as it has the immoral actions of the "adults" as its foundation.

Once again, care to try to formulate a well-reasoned response to the points of my post?

Yawn. Please tell me what you think the argument, that I gave you a link for, is?

[ThinkOfOne]

You missed the point of the OP entirely. I was, as I have mentioned, recasting the Arg from moral diversity (aka Argument from Disagreement, or Argument from Relativity) which I find tends to be represented in a weakened form for no good reason.

You are welcome to take another try now that you understand, but I am not very interested in your overemotional first response.

Nothing to do with "emotion" on my part, though ironically your "howling mad grandmas losing their fucking shit" response shows more than a little on your part. More ego-defense from you.

Your "recasting" was exceedingly weak as it has the immoral actions of the "adults" as its foundation.

Once again, care to try to formulate a well-reasoned response to the points of my post?

Yawn. Please tell me what you think the argument, that I gave you a link for, is?

"Yawn"?. Even more ego-defense from you.

Well, I suppose that if you were capable of formulating a well-reasoned response to the points of my post you would have done by now.

Face it. You posted an exceedingly weak "recasting". Would it kill you to admit it?

[FlashDangerpants]

Nothing to do with "emotion" on my part, though ironically your "howling mad grandmas losing their fucking shit" response shows more than a little on your part. More ego-defense from you.

Your "recasting" was exceedingly weak as it has the immoral actions of the "adults" as its foundation.

Once again, care to try to formulate a well-reasoned response to the points of my post?

Yawn. Please tell me what you think the argument, that I gave you a link for, is?

"Yawn"?. Even more ego-defense from you.

Well, I suppose that if you were capable of formulating a well-reasoned response to the points of my post you would have done by now.

Face it. You posted an exceedingly weak "recasting". Would it kill you to admit it?

Again, please show you understand what the point of the OP was by explaining your take on the argument from moral diversity.

[ThinkOfOne]

Yawn. Please tell me what you think the argument, that I gave you a link for, is?

"Yawn"?. Even more ego-defense from you.

Well, I suppose that if you were capable of formulating a well-reasoned response to the points of my post you would have done by now.

Face it. You posted an exceedingly weak "recasting". Would it kill you to admit it?

Again, please show you understand what the point of the OP was by explaining your take on the argument from moral diversity.

Let's see.

First you "recast the Arg from moral diversity which [you] find tends to be represented in a [WEAK]ened form for no good reason", wherein the "recasting" was exceedingly WEAK as I've already shown. Now instead of addressing any of my points, you are insisting that I first give you my " take on the argument from moral diversity". How about first things first?

Quite frankly, based on your responses thus far, it doesn't seem likely that you're capable of formulating a well-reasoned response to anything.

[FlashDangerpants]

"Yawn"?. Even more ego-defense from you.

Well, I suppose that if you were capable of formulating a well-reasoned response to the points of my post you would have done by now.

Face it. You posted an exceedingly weak "recasting". Would it kill you to admit it?

Again, please show you understand what the point of the OP was by explaining your take on the argument from moral diversity.

Let's see.

First you "recast the Arg from moral diversity which [you] find tends to be represented in a [WEAK]ened form for no good reason", wherein the "recasting" was exceedingly WEAK as I've already shown. Now instead of addressing any of my points, you are insisting that I first give you my " take on the argument from moral diversity". How about first things first?

Quite frankly, based on your responses thus far, it doesn't seem likely that you're capable of formulating a well-reasoned response to anything.

What was the thing I was recasting, and what makes my version of it weak. Please address the argument rather than trying to make this personal.

[ThinkOfOne]

Again, please show you understand what the point of the OP was by explaining your take on the argument from moral diversity.

Let's see.

First you "recast the Arg from moral diversity which [you] find tends to be represented in a [WEAK]ened form for no good reason", wherein the "recasting" was exceedingly WEAK as I've already shown. Now instead of addressing any of my points, you are insisting that I first give you my " take on the argument from moral diversity". How about first things first?

Quite frankly, based on your responses thus far, it doesn't seem likely that you're capable of formulating a well-reasoned response to anything.

What was the thing I was recasting, and what makes my version of it weak. Please address the argument rather than trying to make this personal.

Why are pretending that I haven't already stated what makes your "recasting" weak?

"Please address the argument rather than trying to make this personal."? That's really rich coming from you given your posts on this thread.

[FlashDangerpants]

Let's see.

First you "recast the Arg from moral diversity which [you] find tends to be represented in a [WEAK]ened form for no good reason", wherein the "recasting" was exceedingly WEAK as I've already shown. Now instead of addressing any of my points, you are insisting that I first give you my " take on the argument from moral diversity". How about first things first?

Quite frankly, based on your responses thus far, it doesn't seem likely that you're capable of formulating a well-reasoned response to anything.

What was the thing I was recasting, and what makes my version of it weak. Please address the argument rather than trying to make this personal.

Why are pretending that I haven't already stated what makes your "recasting" weak?

"Please address the argument rather than trying to make this personal."? That's really rich coming from you given your posts on this thread.

You wrote some stuff about adults being bad. That is nothing to do with the arg from moral disagreement, but what I wrote was about that arg. So do you understand the argument from moral disagreement?

It seems that you don't, but that you also cannot admit that sort of thing. If you ask, I will explain it for you and show you how my OP relates. Or you can keep doing the same shit.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

That's just wrong. And the 'faux winner' would have known it was an empty 'win' too. Children are far more intelligent than adults. I feel for your nephew. He now knows that adults are disingenuous, deceitful liars.

Well that child is NOT the ONLY one on earth. As just about EVERY "other" child, in the days when this is being written, have HAD TO grow up with and endure disingenuous, deceitful lying adults. Do you 'feel' for ALL of these ones too?

Why wouldn't I?

[ThinkOfOne]

What was the thing I was recasting, and what makes my version of it weak. Please address the argument rather than trying to make this personal.

Why are pretending that I haven't already stated what makes your "recasting" weak?

"Please address the argument rather than trying to make this personal."? That's really rich coming from you given your posts on this thread.

You wrote some stuff about adults being bad. That is nothing to do with the arg from moral disagreement, but what I wrote was about that arg. So do you understand the argument from moral disagreement?

It seems that you don't, but that you also cannot admit that sort of thing. If you ask, I will explain it for you and show you how my OP relates. Or you can keep doing the same shit.

If you think yourself capable of interacting in a rational and reasonable manner OR presenting a well-reasoned argument, then by all means do. The only thing that has been preventing you from doing so thus far, is yourself. Trying to get you to do so has been quite the chore.

As a matter of curiosity, what do you do for a living?